Forum menu
mrmichaelwright, agreed. She was painful to listen to, wasn't she?
I find it hard to decide who I want to throw my eggs at most personally
indeed. much as I am sure that it is an extremely nerve racking prospect (mrsmw has turned down PM on the grounds of short notice before, you can't get into a barny with Eddy Muir unless you are prepared) she should at least have been able to explain exactly what it was they were trying to prove. spokespeople like that just reinforce the scabby student 'wish washy' hippy stereotype and play into the hands of the likes of Griffin
I woon't waste good eggs on Griffin. Would be disrespectful to the hens that laid them.
I'd say the same about dogshit, even.
I can understand the frustration and anger felt by many people over this, but it has at least got people discussing the issues, which can be turned into a positive thing. It is, as many people are saying, a 'wake-up call'.
Let's hope people don't doze off again...
Stalin was no socialist. He was a totalitarian dictator who used the language of socialism.
G - I understood your post to mean he had a "human right" to make his speech which I don't believe he has. I did say the protesters should have stayed within the law. Assaulting him was wrong. They should have just shouted him down
I actually don't even agree with even that TJ, its the protests that give him the oxygen of publicity and is exactly why he/they provoke them. Best to leave him to it. The press would soon stop reporting nothing happening.
as much as I would love to throw eggs at griffin and his thugs, the protesters shouldn't have resorted to it. It would have been much better of them to stand behind him with banners and watch him losing track of his hatred speech, and finally walking off in anger. That would have been a FAIL on behalf of griffin.
According to their spokeswoman (killing time before daddy gets her a nice job or internship by the sound of things) UAF don't believe in free speech if your views are contrary to theirs - not sure who's the fascist here...meanwhile lets talk about the thousand of workers at LDV and the C&G who lost their jobs this week - what are the UAF or any of the parties that fund it doing for them - nope I reckon the ruling class still hasn't got it.
Can I point out that Unite Against Facism, along with the Labour Party, the Anti Nazi League and others were actually involved in escorting people to the polls, in Millwall in 1994, to ensure that voters felt safe, and free from intimidation from the gangs of BNP thugs who were roaming around trying to scare people into staying in their homes and not voting? This resulted in the BNP being ousted from their seat on the local council. A victory for freedom and equality.
I've done a little bit of work for UAF, and other anti-racist organisations, and whilst there are a few militant individuals, the majority are simply people who care passionately that such abhorrent and divisive views as those held by the British Nazi Party are met with resistance at every opportunity, so that the voice of Fascism is drowned out.
UAF don't believe in free speech if your views are contrary to theirs
Really? Can you prove this?
So, they're worse than the BNP, in your onion, then? Or what? 🙄
Egg-throwing is childish and stupid. Stopping the BNP from speaking out is commendable.
Don't be fooled by the 'Democracy' argument; they're nasty vicious racist thugs. Nothing more, nothing less.
Don't be fooled by the 'Democracy' argument; they're nasty vicious racist thugs. Nothing more, nothing less.
And for this reason the rights and legal system of this country therefore don't apply to them?
So far I am mostly in agreement with G.
I have never held with the nonsense regarding the "oxygen of publicity" - the more people who are exposed to both sides of a debate the better informed they will be to make a decision - it may not be the one you want, but at least you then understand their position.
Eloquent, public destruction of wholly loathsome and misguided ideals will force them back into to holes from which they sprang. Making them appear martyrs will only increase their appeal.
And for this reason the rights and legal system of this country therefore don't apply to them?
Have you any idea what they're really about?
They don't believe in 'rights' for many British people, ffs.
You can get all prissy about Griffin's "rights" but the fact of the matter is that he'd very much like to take away those very same rights to great swathes of the population, and he relies largely on the likes of G to back him up, Now I'm certain G isn't a supporter of the BNP, but they will use the cover of "Democracy" and "freedom of speech" to further their fetid aims and views, and when you protect his rights, you unwittingly protect his viewpoint. What did that Frenchman Voltaire say "I disagree with you but I'm willing to die for your right to say it"? Fine words, but at what point to you draw a line, and say "Apart from that point of view"...
In this case, against these people, I am happy to be counted on the side of the egg throwers.
Only a fool would defend Nick Griffin's 'human rights'. The BNP was [u]specifically[/u] formed to deny people their human rights. In fact denying other people their human rights goes to the very core of the BNP's philosophy. Take that away, and their 'reason d'etre' has disappear - there is no longer any reason for them to exist.
At best, fascists [i]may[/i] be tolerated. But they should never be defended. They should always be opposed by whatever means any given situation requires. If necessary through the ballot box, if necessary with eggs, if necessary (God forbid) with guns. But they should [i]always[/i] be opposed. If they were ever to win a general election I would [u]never[/u] accept the result. I would do whatever was necessary legally [i]or/and[/i] illegally to oppose them. Have we learnt [i]nothing[/i] from history ffs ? Have we learnt nothing from the Nuremberg Trials?
My father volunteered to fight and die in two wars solely because fascists wanted to deny people their human rights. But unsurprisingly, he wasn't much bothered about the human rights of Franco's Fascists or Hitler's Nazis. 70 years on, I'm certainly not going to defend the leader of the BNP against "eggs". Although I would undoubtedly defend him if there were attempts to truss him up mussolini style.
[img] 
[/img]
But only because it isn't yet necessary, when it is, I'll supply the rope.
BTW G, don't blame those who voted BNP, they are amongst the least guilty. Blame Griffin for being a Nazi. Blame New Labour for abandoning their own core voters and driving them into the arms of Fascists. And blame the Guardian for stabbing Labour in the back days before an election.
The only totally innocent party in this sorry state of affairs, are the Tories. For once.
No they're not! It's the Tories who've instilled selfish, greedy right-wing views in people in this country in the first place, EL!
Well, of course it's her fault. Who else's would it be? 🙄
EDIT: I'd better not say that. Might upset someone, who'll grass me up to t'mods, and I'll get banned.
Again...
So they got a couple of seats. How can anybody say that because they're evil or biggotted they have no human rights. Even the vilest criminal has human rights unfortunately. By everyone standing on their own little soap box and spouting their two penth worth into the the interweb. It just keeps them at the fore front. If you dont like them, dont vote for them, dont advertise them. If they are not news worthy, the media wont report them!
Even the vilest criminal has human rights unfortunately.
Well that's news to me. How come we have prisons then ?
Sounds to me like we take away the rights of people who don't behave in a civilised manner.
Perhaps we shouldn't do it any more ?
Well that's news to me. How come we have prisons then ?
Prisoners still have human rights.
BTW G, don't blame those who voted BNP, they are amongst the least guilty
You're going to have to explain that one to me ❓
Read what comes after that - that's the explanation. Or do you me to expand ?
Prisoners still have human rights.
Their human rights are somewhat restricted I believe. Unless of course you don't think 'freedom' is a human right.
[i]Well, of course it's her fault. Who else's would it be?[/i]
surely not MHT ❗
What is everyone scared of? Griffin turns up anywhere he is pelted with eggs, students bar his speeches etc etc What is really the issue? Are we truly scared of such a-holes? The pathetic attempts by some have only managed to provide Griffin with much needed publicity.
The simple truth is let him speak - to deny him and others is simply undemocratic.
Let him speak and his arguments and his party will vanish like autumn mist - keep pelting him with eggs and you create a media feeding frenzy.
You've got one egg left..........
[img] 
[/img]
Sorry EL, can't have that. Feeling disenfranchised is no excuse to vote BNP.
You've got one egg left..........
No-brainer.
Keep egg, for eating later, and throw brick at Maggie.
Human rights as defined in the human rights act:
Some are absolute and some are qualified. for example the right to freedom is qualified by the need to obey the law. Break the law and you can have your freedom restricted. Religous worship is absolute IIRC
However as far as I know nothing in the human rights act would give him the right to make speeches outside the houses of parliament without running the risk of counter demos
Feeling disenfranchised is no excuse to vote BNP.
Who said it was an excuse ? I said : "they are amongst the least guilty".
G said : "Personally I'd throw egss, hammers and bricks at the ****wits who thought voting for the BNP was some sort of sensible thing to do.......don't blame Nick Griffin"
Nick Griffin has no accuse at all for being a Nazi and a liar.
The Labour Party has no excuse at all for abandoning their core voters.
The Guardian has no excuse at all for stabbing Labour in the back a couple of days before an election.
You can't blame BNP voters for the behaviour of those above. And perhaps if those above had behaved differently, the election result would have been different.
So, in summary, freedom of speech is ok as long as you agree with what is being said, and democracy is sound as long as you agree with the result.
A democratically elected member of a parliament can be assaulted by having eggs thrown at him because other people find what he has to say offensive.
Well, if that's ok, if you disagree with the roads around where you stay being closed for a few hours, even though this was sanctioned by the democratically elected representatives for the area, it'll be ok to scatter some carpet tacks around then?
BigBut
I think that's the vien of my post! Well said - let the little pratt have his say. Why lower yourselfs to BNP levels? Nobody should be scared of them - pushing such an organisation underground is extremely dangerous - bring him out in the open and lets have a full discussion - he'd be made a laughing stock
I think Jake and Elwood had the right idea: [url=
hate ****in Nazis[/url]
tankslap - yup, the only way to beat them is in a fair fight - and that's through the ballot box. today's little farce will be used by the toad faced little freak to show how the big boys in the playground are ganging up on him. had the anti-free speech fascists, or whatever they're calling themselves not decided to kick off, the speech would have been a non-event no story, no chubby little freak on tele tonight.
You Brits got this ****head leader of BNP loads of publicity. If nobody turned up, including media, he would present his opinion to ever-shitting pigeons. By pelting him with eggs you gave him media time. [b][u]You bloody should've used bricks, hammers and condons full of oil-based paint[/b][/u]. That've learned him 😉
That's the very reason I couldnt understand those muppets in Oxford when Gripshit turned up to talk - wtf were they thinking about. If he had been allowed to speak he would have been laughed out of town. Instead, what? A massive on goal by the intelligensia - you would have almost thought they were in support of him!
Well, if that's ok, if you disagree with the roads around where you stay being closed for a few hours,
What . the . **** . you talking about ?
We're talking about Fascists. Not about shutting a ****ing road.
We're talking about an ideology based on hating people.
How they gain influence whether it's democratically, or undemocratically, makes absolutely no difference to me. I don't care if three quarters of the population votes Fascist, I will [u]never[/u] accept their right to power. I will [u]always[/u] oppose them. And as their influence grows, my intolerance to them will increase.
The simple truth is let him speak - to deny him and others is simply undemocratic.
I would beg to differ. You are talking about a party that by its very own nature would deny us all Democracy. Same for the Communists.
A massive on goal by the intelligensia
I love this, generally spouted by right wingers who are afraid of intelligent people.
No, we're talking about free speech in a democratic state. According to you, because you disagree with Griffin it's ok to assault him. that means what you're saying is that it's ok to break the law just because you disagree with something. in which case, carpet tack boy in perthshire was right to break the law because he disagreed with the etape.
fundamentally the same thing - it's about freedom of expression. it's either right or wrong. if it's right it's right in both cases, if it's wrong in both.
I may not agree with what you say but I will defend to the death your right to say it?
Attributed to Voltaire, and IMHO, one of the cornerstones of democratic thought
How they gain influence whether it's democratically, or undemocratically, makes absolutely no difference to me
The will of the people makes no difference to me - IMHO a cornerstone of fascist philosophy
So you'd be happy to defend to the death his right to say all those things? Despite the fact that if he ever got to power he'd happily ignore those rights?
You'll have died to further the cause of fascism...You OK with that?
In this instance the hysterical and irrational far left have given the BNP a propaganda coup.
The winning candidates of a lawful political party in a democratic election (rightly or wrongly thats the truth of the matter) hold a civilised press conference which is then disrupted by left wing thugs denying free speech.
Who are the fascists here? Where is the hate on show?
Anyone watching the news will clearly have seen and I am sure made their unbiased assessment of the proceedings
The million odd people who voted for the BNP are only going to be further galvanised by this.
It's a shame that the political parties so upset by the BNP's success didn't do something before the election.
I live in Yorkshire and we didn't get a single visit by a candidate or leaflet through the door from any party. It's not surprising voters stayed at home and the BNP benefited.
[b]The wheels on the bus go
round and round
round and round
round and round
The wheels on the bus go
round and round
All day long
The horn on the bus goes
beep, beep, beep
beep, beep, beep
beep, beep, beep
The horn on the bus goes
beep, beep, beep
All day long
The wipers on the bus go
swish, swish, swish
swish, swish, swish
swish, swish, swish
The wipers on the bus go
swish, swish, swish
All day long
The people on the bus go
chatter, chatter, chatter
chatter, chatter, chatter
chatter, chatter, chatter
The people on the bus go
chatter, chatter, chatter
All day long
The baby on the bus goes
wah, wah, wah
wah, wah, wah
wah, wah, wah
The baby on the bus goes
wah, wah, wah
All day long
The bell on the bus goes
ding, ding, ding
ding, ding, ding
ding, ding, ding
The bell on the bus goes
ding, ding, ding
All day long
The wheels on the bus go
round and round
round and round
round and round
The wheels on the bus go
round and round
All day long
All day long [/b]
It has nothing at all to do with 'disagreeing' with Fascists. It's about not tolerating Fascism. Where's the bit where I say that people which I disagree with I don't tolerate ? ffs.
It seems like almost everyday I'm here saying that muslims, homosexuals, or gypsies should be tolerated. I am not muslim, homosexual or gypsy, so I obviously disagree with them.
But I do not tolerate an ideology which is based on hating people. And I never will.
Paedophiles are not tolerated [u]not[/u] because people disagree with them, but because their behaviour is simply not tolerable. Plenty of other people have strange sexual preferences, but despite the fact that most people might disagree with them, they are not thrown into prison.
It's not about 'disagreeing' it's about not tolerating.
.
Voltaire never said that btw.